Modeling Spatial and Temporal Set-Based Constraints During Conceptual Database Design

References

• Allen J. F. Maintaining knowledge about temporal intervals. Comm. ACM (1983) 26(11):832–843Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bajaj A. Managing business workflows using a database approach: A formal model, a case study and a prototype. (1997) . Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Arizona, TucsonGoogle Scholar
• Balaban M., Shoval P., Siau K. Enforcing cardinality constraints in the ER model with integrity methods. Advanced Topics in Database Research (2002) 1(Idea Group Publishing, Hershey, PA) 1–16Crossref, Google Scholar
• Batini C., Ceri S., Navathe S. B.Conceptual Database Design: An Entity-Relationship Approach (1992) (The Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Company, Redwood City, CA) Google Scholar
• Batra D. Conceptual data modeling patterns: Representation and validation. J. Database Management (2005) 16(2):84–106Crossref, Google Scholar
• Batra D., Hoffer J. A., Bostrom R. P. Comparing representations with relational and EER models. Comm. ACM (1990) 33(2):126–139Crossref, Google Scholar
• Benbasat I., Goldstein D. K., Mead M. The case research strategy in studies of information systems. MIS Quart. (1987) 11(3):369–386Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bettini C., Jajodia S., Wang S. X.Time Granularities in Databases, Data Mining, and Temporal Reasoning (2000) (Springer-Verlag, New York) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Boehm B.Software Engineering Economics (1976) (Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ) Google Scholar
• Borges K. A. V., Laender A. H. F., Davis C. A., Doorn J. H., Rivero L. C. Integrity constraints in spatial databases. Database Integrity: Challenges and Solutions (2002) (Idea Group, Hershey, PA) 144–171Crossref, Google Scholar
• Calvanese D., Lenzerini M., Nardi D., Chomicki J., Saake G. Description logics for conceptual data modeling. Logics for Databases and Information Systems (1998) (Kluwer, Norwell, MA) 229–263Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cavaye A. L. M. Case study research: A multi-faceted research approach for IS. Inform. Systems J. (1996) 6(3):227–242Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chaves A., Carvalho J. A. Expressiveness and legibility in conceptual modelling: A comparison of three techniques. Proc. Workshop Evaluation Modeling Methods Systems Anal. Design (1996) Heraklion, GreeceGoogle Scholar
• Chen P. P. The entity-relationship model—Toward a unified view of data. ACM Trans. Database Systems (1976) 1(1):9–36Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cockroft S. A taxonomy of spatial data integrity constraints. GeoInformatica (1997) 1(4):327–343Crossref, Google Scholar
• Currim F. Spatio-temporal set-based constraints in conceptual modeling: A theoretical framework and evaluation. (2004) . Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Arizona, TucsonGoogle Scholar
• Currim F., Ram S. Understanding the concept of completeness in frameworks for modeling cardinality constraints. Proc. 16th Workshop Inform. Tech. Systems (2006) Milwaukee:31–36Crossref, Google Scholar
• Currim F., Ram S. Conceptually modeling windows and bounds for space and time in database constraints. Comm. ACM (2008) 51(11):125–129Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dailey M. J. Franchise rules you should know. J. Accountancy (1998) 186(3):57–61Google Scholar
• Darke P., Shanks G., Broadbent M. Successfully completing case study research: Combining rigour, relevance and pragmatism. Inform. Systems J. (1998) 8(4):273–289Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dey D., Barron T. M., Storey V. C. A conceptual model for the logical design of temporal databases. Decision Support Systems (1995) 15(4):305–321Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dobing B., Parsons J. How UML is used. Comm. ACM (2006) 49(5):109–113Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dubé L., Paré G. Rigor in information systems positivist case research: Current practices, trends, and recommendations. MIS Quant. (2003) 27(4):597–636Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dyreson C. E., Evans W. S., Lin H., Snodgrass R. T. Efficiently supporting temporal granularities. IEEE Trans. Knowledge Data Engrg. (2000) 12(4):568–587Crossref, Google Scholar
• Egenhofer M. J., Franzosa R. D. Point-set topological spatial relations. Internat. J. Geographic Inform. Systems (1991) 5(2):161–174Crossref, Google Scholar
• Elmasri R., Navathe S. B.Fundamentals of Database Systems (2006) (Addison Wesley, Boston) Google Scholar
• Elmasri R., El-Assal I., Kouramajian V. Semantics of temporal data in an extended ER model. Proc. Ninth Internat. Conf. Entity-Relationship Approach (1990) Lausanne, Switzerland:249–264Google Scholar
• Frank A. U. Spatial concepts, geometric data models, and geometric data structures. Comput. Geosciences (1992) 18(4):409–417Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gregersen H., Jensen C. S. Temporal entity-relationship models—A survey. IEEE Trans. Knowledge Data Engrg. (1999) 11(3):464–497Crossref, Google Scholar
• Halpin T.Information Modeling and Relational Databases (2001) (Morgan Kauffman Publishers, Burlington, MA) Google Scholar
• Hammer M., McLeod D. Database description with SDM: A semantic database model. ACM Trans. Database Systems (1981) 6(3):351–386Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hevner A. R., March S. T., Park J., Ram S. Design science in information systems research. MIS Quart. (2004) 28(1):75–105Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hull R., King R. Semantic database modeling survey, applications, and research issues. ACM Comput. Surveys (1987) 19(3):210–260Crossref, Google Scholar
• ISO Information processing systems—Concepts and terminology for the conceptual schema and the information base. (1987) . ISO/JTC 1/SC 32Google Scholar
• Jensen C. S., Dyreson C. E., Böhlen M. H., Clifford J., Elmasri R., Gadia S. K., Grandi F., et al., Jensen C. S., Clifford J., Elmasri R., Gadia S. K., Hayes P. J., Jajodia S. The consensus glossary of temporal database concepts—February 1998 version. Temporal Databases: Research and Practice (1998) (Springer, Secaucus, NJ) 367–405Crossref, Google Scholar
• Khatri V. Bridging the spatio-temporal semantic gap: A theoretical framework, evaluation and a prototype system. (2002) . Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Arizona, TucsonGoogle Scholar
• Khatri V., Ram S., Snodgrass R. T. Augmenting a conceptual model with geo-spatio-temporal annotations. IEEE Trans. Knowledge Data Engrg. (2004) 16(11):1324Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kim Y.-G., March S. T. Comparing data modeling formalisms. Comm. ACM (1995) 38(6):103–115Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lee A. S. A scientific methodology for MIS case studies. MIS Quart. (1989) 13(1):33–50Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lenzerini M., Santucci G. Cardinality constraints in the entity-relationship model. Proc. 3rd Internat. Conf. Entity-Relationship Approach (1983) (North Holland, Amsterdam) 529–549Google Scholar
• Liddle S. W., Embley D. W., Woodfield S. N. Cardinality constraints in semantic data models. Data Knowledge Engrg. (1993) 11(3):235–270Crossref, Google Scholar
• López I. F. V., Snodgrass R. T., Moon B. Spatiotemporal aggregate computation: A survey. IEEE Trans. Knowledge Data Engrg. (2005) 17(2):271–286Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mantha R. W. Data flow and data structure modeling for database requirements determination: A comparative study. MIS Quart. (1987) 11(4):531–545Crossref, Google Scholar
• McAllister A. Complete rules for n-ary relationship cardinality constraints. Data Knowledge Engrg. (1998) 27(3):255–288Crossref, Google Scholar
• Moody D. L. Metrics for evaluating the quality of entity relationship models. Proc. 17th Internat. Conf. Conceptual Modeling (1998) (Springer, Berlin) 211–225Crossref, Google Scholar
• Moody D. L., Shanks G. G. What makes a good data model? Evaluating the quality of entity relationship models. Proc. Thirteenth Internat. Conf. Entity-Relationship Approach (1994) (Springer, Berlin) 94–111Crossref, Google Scholar
• OMG Model driven architecture. (2001) . Retrieved April 11, http://www.omg.org/mda/Google Scholar
• OMG Object constraint language specification, v 2.3.1. (2012) . Retrieved January 19, 2012, http://www.omg.org/spec/OCL/2.3.1/Google Scholar
• Palvia P. C., Liao C., To P.-L. The impact of conceptual data models on end-user performance. J. Database Management (1992) 3(4):4–15Crossref, Google Scholar
• Parent C., Spaccapietra S., Zimányi E.Conceptual Modeling for Traditional and Spatio-Temporal Applications: The MADS Approach (2006) (Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, Germany) Google Scholar
• Paton N. W., Díaz O. Active database systems. ACM Comput. Surveys (1999) 31(1):63–103Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ram S. Intelligent database design using the unifying semantic model. Inform. Management (1995) 29(4):191–206Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ram S., Khatri V. A comprehensive framework for modeling set-based business rules during conceptual database design. Inform. Systems (2005) 30(2):89–118Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ramamoorthy C. V., Prakash A., Tsai W., Usuda Y. Software engineering: Problems and perspectives. IEEE Comput. (1984) 17(10):191–209Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ramesh V., Ram S. Integrity constraint integration in heterogeneous databases: An enhanced methodology for schema integration. Inform. Systems (1997) 22(9):423–446Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rauh O., Stickel E. Entity tree clustering—A method for simplifying ER designs. Proc. 11th Internat. Conf. Entity-Relationship Approach (1992) (Springer, Berlin) 62–78Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rigaux P., Scholl M., Voisard A.Spatial Databases With Application to GIS (2002) (Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco) Google Scholar
• Rouvellou I., Degenaro L., Rasmus K., Ehnebuske D., McKee B. Extending business objects with business rules. Proc. 33rd Internat. Conf. Tech. Object-Oriented Languages (2000) (IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC) 238–249Crossref, Google Scholar
• RTI The economic impacts of inadequate infrastructure for software testing. (2002) . Planning Report 02-3, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Gaithersburg, MDGoogle Scholar
• Rundensteiner E. A., Bic L., Gilbert J. P., Yin M.-L. A semantic integrity framework: Set restrictions for semantic groupings. Proc. Seventh Internat. Conf. Data Engrg. (1991) (IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC) 710–717Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shao J., Pound C. J. Extracting business rules from information systems. BT Tech. J. (1999) 17(4):179–186Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simsion G. C.Data Modeling Essentials (2001) (Coriolis Group, Scottsdale, AZ) Google Scholar
• Snodgrass R. T.Developing Time-Oriented Database Applications in SQL (1999) (Morgan Kaufmann, Burlington, MA) Morgan Kaufmann Series in Data Management SystemsGoogle Scholar
• Steinbrook R. Protecting research subjects—The crisis at Johns Hopkins. New England J. Medicine (2002) 346(9):716–720Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tauzovich B. Towards temporal extensions to the entity-relationship model. Proc. 10th Internat. Conf. Entity-Relationship Approach (1991) (ER Institute, Gunnison, CO) 163–179Google Scholar
• Terenziani P., Snodgrass R. T. Reconciling point-based and interval-based semantics in temporal databases: A treatment of the telic/atelic distinction. IEEE Trans. Knowledge Data Engrg. (2004) 16(5):540–551Crossref, Google Scholar
• Thalheim B. An overview on semantical constraints for database models. Proc. 6th Internat. Conf. Intellectual Systems Comput. Sci. (1996) MoscowGoogle Scholar
• Thalheim B.Entity-Relationship Modeling: Foundations of Database Technology (2000) (Springer-Verlag, Berlin) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Torp K., Jensen C. S., Snodgrass R. T. Modification semantics in now-relative databases. Inform. Systems (2004) 29(8):653–683Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tryfona N., Jensen C. S. Conceptual data modeling for spatiotemporal applications. GeoInformatica (1999) 3(3):245–268Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tryfona N., Jensen C. S., Shekhar S., Xiong H. Spatio-temporal database modeling with an extended entity-relationship model. Encyclopedia of GIS (2008) (Springer, Secaucus, NJ) 1115–1121Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tsotras V. J., Jensen C. S., Snodgrass R. T. An extensible notation for spatiotemporal index queries. SIGMOD Rec. (1998) 27(1):47–53Crossref, Google Scholar
• Urban S. D., Lim B. B. An intelligent framework for active support of database semantics. Internat. J. Expert Systems (1993) 6(1):1–37Crossref, Google Scholar
• Von Halle B.Business Rules Applied: Building Better Systems Using the Business Rules Approach (2002) (John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ) Google Scholar
• Warmer J. B., Kleppe A. G.The Object Constraint Language: Getting Your Models Ready for MDA (2003) (Addison-Wesley Professional, Boston) Google Scholar
• Widom J., Ceri S.Active Database Systems: Triggers and Rules for Advanced Database Processing (1996) (Morgan Kauffman, San Francisco) Google Scholar
• Wijsen J., Ng R. T. Temporal dependencies generalized for spatial and other dimensions. Proc. Spatio-Temporal Database Management, Internat. Workshop (1999) (Springer-Verlag, London) 189–203Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wing J. M. Computational thinking. Comm. ACM (2006) 49(3):33–35Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yin R. K.Case Study Research: Design and Methods (2002) (Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA) Google Scholar